As far as I know it's not the wording they are lookng for. They are looking at why you want to study law and why at their school, and any challenge you had to overcome. If you have to ask people you don't know, then that should tell you it's not worth it. One word does not an essay make. However, one word, could destroy an essay. I was always taught to keep it on the safe side when in doubt. Shock value, although that is not what you are doing, and it may be perceived as such by the adcomms, is not advisable. Play it safe. Your smart enough to write an awesome essay without one word, or two (transvestism) ruining it. Although if you had helped a person overcome his addiction to masturbation, then that is a totally different story.

"When ever you feel like masturbating, look at a picture of swifty, that will calm your urges."

dta

Actually, that looks correct. Here's an interesting twist though. What if the nound is not condensed? That is, what if "jack off" is used as two words but indicating a single entity? Which, then, of the following would be correct?

1. You jack off's are being so silly.

or

2. You jack offs are being so silly.

The original usage, which lexylit objected to, involved this sort of use of "jack off" as a noun. That is, it was used as two-word designation of a single entity, not a single-word designation ala jackoff.

Yes, arguing about grammar is silly. But if one is going to be clever and witty and use grammar naziism to come off as sophisticated then one ought to be prepared for a battle of nitpicking.